The 2012 Survey of Affluence and Wealth in America, from American Express Publishing and Harrison Group, finds that One Percenters are hoarding three times as much cash as they were two years ago. Their savings rate soared to 34 percent in the second quarter of 2012, up from 12 percent in 2007.

Higher savings would normally be good for the economy. But not now, when capital is needed to invest in growth and jobs. The One Percenters put 56 percent of their available cash into savings accounts and money markets in 2012 – that’s up from 24 percent in 2007.

They’re investing just 44 percent in financial markets – down from 76 percent in 2007. More One Percenters say the stock market is “a real risk” rather than a “real opportunity.” That’s a big switch from just last year, when 62 percent said the market was an opportunity.

Huh. That’s odd, because I’d have thought the more money you have, the more specific you can be with your investments. There’s a big difference between “the stock market” being risky and every stock being risky. Some of them will still make money, no matter how bad the economy is.

So I dunno whether this should concern me or not. Tell me when they start “hoarding” canned goods and ammunition.Then I’ll start to worry.

I’m a little more concerned with the tone of this article. For example:

“Higher savings would normally be good for the economy. But not now, when capital is needed to invest in growth and jobs.”

And:

Whatever you call them, and whatever your politics, there is no doubting that the One Percent is on the defensive – culturally, financially and psychologically. And now a new poll shows that their fear and lack of risk taking may be imposing real financial costs on the economy.

“They’re sitting on the money, they’re using it for their own — they’re putting it someplace else with no interest in helping you with your life, with that money. We’ve allowed them to take that. That’s not theirs, that’s a national resource, that’s ours. We all have this — we all benefit from this or we all suffer as a result of not having it,”

The writer might not have meant it that way, but you sure could interpret it that way.